PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

WQDS.L (iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and CNDX.L (iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - WQDS.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI World High Dividend Yield ESG Reduced Carbon Target Select Index, while CNDX.L is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, WQDS.L returned 13.76%/yr vs 18.88%/yr for CNDX.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WQDS.L charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CNDX.L.

Performance

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (WQDS.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

WQDS.L is traded in GBp, while CNDX.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CNDX.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WQDS.L achieves a 15.10% return, which is significantly lower than CNDX.L's 20.14% return.

WQDS.L

1D
0.14%
1M
7.68%
YTD
15.10%
6M
15.33%
1Y
33.20%
3Y*
17.21%
5Y*
13.76%
10Y*
—

CNDX.L

1D
-0.66%
1M
8.19%
YTD
20.14%
6M
17.88%
1Y
40.89%
3Y*
24.77%
5Y*
18.88%
10Y*
22.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
WQDS.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		15.10%16.53%12.46%11.62%4.66%18.72%-2.56%19.86%-1.40%2.29%
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		20.14%11.22%28.66%48.50%-25.54%29.17%43.97%32.82%4.84%6.23%

Correlation

The correlation between WQDS.L and CNDX.L is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.56

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.61

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2017

0.63

The correlation between WQDS.L and CNDX.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
WQDS.L
CNDX.L

Technology

35.2%
57.3%

Financial Services

16.9%
0.2%

Healthcare

14.4%
3.8%

Industrials

11.1%
2.8%

Communication Services

5.4%
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

4.3%
11.6%

Energy

4.1%
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.6%
6.9%

Utilities

3.1%
1.3%

Real Estate

1.3%
0.1%

Basic Materials

0.7%
1.1%

Technology

WQDS.L
35.2%
CNDX.L
57.3%

Financial Services

WQDS.L
16.9%
CNDX.L
0.2%

Healthcare

WQDS.L
14.4%
CNDX.L
3.8%

Industrials

WQDS.L
11.1%
CNDX.L
2.8%

Communication Services

WQDS.L
5.4%
CNDX.L
14.5%

Consumer Cyclical

WQDS.L
4.3%
CNDX.L
11.6%

Energy

WQDS.L
4.1%
CNDX.L
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

WQDS.L
3.6%
CNDX.L
6.9%

Utilities

WQDS.L
3.1%
CNDX.L
1.3%

Real Estate

WQDS.L
1.3%
CNDX.L
0.1%

Basic Materials

WQDS.L
0.7%
CNDX.L
1.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF

Often compared with WQDS.L:
WQDS.L vs. PSRE.LWQDS.L vs. FGQD.LWQDS.L vs. VGWD.DEWQDS.L vs. TDGB.LWQDS.L vs. NQSE.DEWQDS.L vs. IS3Q.DEWQDS.L vs. UDVD.L
Often compared with CNDX.L:
CNDX.L vs. QQQCNDX.L vs. EQQQ.DECNDX.L vs. SXRV.DECNDX.L vs. CNX1.LCNDX.L vs. CSPX.LCNDX.L vs. EQQU.LCNDX.L vs. VWRA.L

Return for Risk

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
WQDS.L
WQDS.L Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
WQDS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WQDS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
WQDS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
WQDS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
WQDS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
CNDX.L
CNDX.L Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNDX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (WQDS.L) and iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

WQDS.LCNDX.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.19
2.61

+0.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.56
3.49

+1.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.46

+0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.90

3.70

+1.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.20

10.51

+7.69

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WQDS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.19, which is comparable to the CNDX.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WQDS.L and CNDX.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

WQDS.LCNDX.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.19

2.61

+0.58

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.19

0.94

+0.25

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

1.11

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.80

1.17

-0.37

Drawdowns

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WQDS.L drawdown since its inception was -24.24%, smaller than the maximum CNDX.L drawdown of -27.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WQDS.L and CNDX.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

WQDS.LCNDX.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.24%

-27.74%

+3.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.75%

-11.11%

+4.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.93%

-24.37%

+9.44%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.93%

-27.74%

+12.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-27.74%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.66%

+0.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.87%

-4.72%

+1.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.82%

3.93%

-2.11%

Volatility

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (WQDS.L) is 3.09%, while iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF (CNDX.L) has a volatility of 4.89%. This indicates that WQDS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNDX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

WQDS.LCNDX.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.09%

4.89%

-1.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.72%

11.60%

-3.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.37%

15.74%

-5.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.58%

20.08%

-8.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.22%

20.20%

-6.98%

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

WQDS.L has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than CNDX.L's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

WQDS.L vs. CNDX.L - Dividend Comparison

WQDS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.90%, while CNDX.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNDX.L
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.02%0.05%0.06%0.03%0.04%0.07%0.06%0.30%0.16%0.16%
WQDS.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		2.90%3.12%3.24%3.55%3.56%3.71%3.84%3.98%4.19%1.05%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

WQDS.L and CNDX.L have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CNDX.L is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CNDX.L is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for WQDS.L.

WQDS.L is categorized as Global Equities, while CNDX.L is Nasdaq-100. WQDS.L tracks MSCI World High Dividend Yield ESG Reduced Carbon Target Select Index, while CNDX.L tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for WQDS.L and 0.33% for CNDX.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for WQDS.L and CNDX.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer